Diversity in Museums.

Haven’t read this yet, but my old boss is right at the center of it. He’s a good man.

Hopefully we can start a conversation in the comments. I’ll be back with more after I check it out.

EDIT: Well, I’m reading it and responding before this thing is even posted. I like the way that works out. Here’s the gist of the article, for those too lazy to click:

…you do not have to look at major US art museums for long to realise that most of the senior management is white, unlike staff at comparable levels in corporations, universities and government offices. When is this going to change? Those leading efforts to diversify museums say the economic reality of who pays to support institutions has not evolved sufficiently to require any lasting push for change. But American demographics are shifting swiftly. US minority groups will become the majority in a few decades. And art museums will have to diversify to survive.

And whoa…here’s the money line, from Dr. Johnetta Cole:

“You cannot compete well in a highly diverse, global market if your workforce represents only a thin slice of those who live in the world.”

People. That’s what we’ve been trying to say. And I’m going to speak to the theaters right now, and I’m going to speak in real clear terms (although maybe not even as clear as I’d like to be): your continued insistence on programming plays by, for, and about the same old people with the same old money is rendering you UNABLE TO COMPETE. You will be left behind.

And there’s this from Dr. Lehman, my old boss himself:

Lehman also urges a sustained, pro-active effort in exhibitions, which a diverse staff can help develop. But exhibitions should not be presented to attract diverse audiences “only every few years. The notion, for instance, of presenting African-American programming only in February, which is Black History Month, is ridiculous, and perhaps even counterproductive.”

Slot system, people. And here’s the thing: the fact that this stuff even needs to be articulated goes to show why you MUST have people of color (and women, and GLBT folks, and so on…) on your artistic staff — because it’s stuff that you all aren’t even thinking about without us.

I mean, listen. I once had an artistic director tell me that “the only way I can do two black shows in a season is if one is a musical and one is August Wilson.” That’s a direct quote. And that was in a city with as many African-American residents as white ones. If that’s your attitude, than not only will you not be able to reach that community…you shouldn’t be reaching that community. You shouldn’t have access to them and their money.

2 comments

There are parallels to your discontent with museums in public education (and private as well).
You point out that museum boards are made of relatively homogenous groups that don’t necessarily reflect the groups funding and/or attending the museums, and the result is “exclusively inclusive” exhibits. The same homogeneity exists in school curricula- oftentimes, nationwide, and for much the same reason.

An old professor of mine, Carl Glickman, asserts that one of the most powerful- and far reaching (in terms of years)- groups of people in the nation is the 15-member Texas State Board of Education. Texas is the largest market for public school textbooks in the nation. As such, all textbook publishers strive to get the stamp of approval from the TSBOE. I just looked at the TSBOE website, and there are 11 white members (and for what it’s worth, 10 Republicans)- and this is in a state that has crossed over into “majority minority”population status!

The problem is this- with every textbook company- art, language, math, science- striving to please just 15 people is that those textbooks tend to stay in circulation for 7-10 years. Entire school cycles of children- nationwide now, because a textbook company isn’t going to publish one set of books for TX and one for the rest of the US- are educated by a single set of values and appreciations of a very small group of people.

So kids- including the ones who will grow up to be curators, contributors, and board members- are inculcated with literature surveys that are almost exclusively the “safe,” “politically correct,” and, help us, “traditional” DWM Canon. In a 36 week American Literature curriculum, kids learn about contributions to African American art through a single 2-week unit on the Harlem Renaissance. And apparently Anne Bradstreet & Emily Dickinson are the only women to have made contributions to American art or letters. Occasionally Grandma Moses or Shirley Jackson. And any Latino contributors are pointed out, rather than integrated into the regular text, as “Art of Central America” in the “Cultural Connections” section at the back of the chapter.

While I do agree with some of Ed Hirsch’s work in Cultural Literacy and the advantages of some homogeneity in experience, and some aspects of some literature teachers’ defense of the DWM Canon, I am finding it increasingly disadvantageous to not expand into more diverse expressions of and creators of art. Sadly, it’s the materials and money provided that force entire generations of understanding this “exclusive inclusiveness” of Black History Month/ August Wilson as the token “African-American” offering in a season, etc. as the way art and it’s creators are supposed to be presented.